The Lexifore Leeway Act

[Eðo Grischun]

WHEREAS El Lexhatx E.4 sets a strict mandatory limit on the immigration process where a prospective citizens' application is to be terminated if a citizenship application is not lodged with The Chancery after 40 days of the examination period beginning, and

WHEREAS sometimes a prospective citizen needs a little more time to settle in and become engaged, and

WHEREAS sometimes a little more time is needed for people to get to know each other, and

WHEREAS a recent case has shown that while rejecting an application too late doesn't really matter much, rejecting one too early may cause an issue, and

WHEREAS the law, oddly, doesn't make an explicit provision for terminating an application when the prospective never, ever shows up in the first place, so

THEREFORE be it enacted by the Ziu assembled that El Lexhatx E.4 is rewritten as follows:

An examination period shall begin with the prospective citizen’s first posting to Wittenberg after an introduction by the Interior Minister. At any time at least fifteen days after the beginning of the examination period, any current citizen of Talossa may petition the Secretary of State requesting that a Royal Grant of Citizenship be issued to the prospective citizen. If no such petition is laid before the Secretary of State within the first sixty days of the examination period, the examination period shall end, the immigration process for the prospective citizen shall be terminated, and their Wittenberg account shall be disabled. In addition, if a prospective citizen fails to ever make a first posting to Wittenberg within thirty days of their introduction by the Interior Minister then the immigration process for the prospective citizen shall be terminated, and his Wittenberg account shall be disabled. Furthermore, whenever an immigration process is terminated then the Interior Minister shall notify the nation and the prospective citizen of the termination, and shall post a notification to the effect on Wittenberg.

[Eðo Grischun]

The changes are:

1. The mandatory limit for a Lexifore (LEX.E.4) changed from 40 days to 60.

2. A new limit of 30 days for when a prospective never makes a first post on Witt in the first place.

3. Removing the requirement for the SoS to notify following termination and making it the duty of Interior (The SoS hasn't done this for donkey years, so basically this last change is a 'make it say what we do instead of a do what we say' sort of thing).

[Açafat del Val]

I like this bill a lot as it is. Should be clarked once eligible.

[Glüc da Dhi]

Jan 7, 2020 4:35:22 GMT -6 Eðo Grischun said:

3. Removing the requirement for the SoS to notify following termination and making it the duty of Interior (The SoS hasn't done this for donkey years, so basically this last change is a 'make it say what we do instead of a do what we say' sort of thing).

I had no idea I had to do that (or maybe I knew at some point but forgot). Either way, thanks for fixing this.

[Eðo Grischun]

Glüc da Dhi

There are two bill on the Clark that seek to amend the same statute. This Lexifore Leeway Act here and The Witt is not Talossa Act from Ian Plätschisch. Both seek to amend LEX.E.4

Now, both bills do completely different things and are not in conflict with each other. Could the Chancery confirm what will happen if both bills pass?

[Glüc da Dhi]

Feb 1, 2020 22:41:02 GMT -6 Eðo Grischun said:

Glüc da Dhi

There are two bill on the Clark that seek to amend the same statute. This Lexifore Leeway Act here and The Witt is not Talossa Act from Ian Plätschisch. Both seek to amend LEX.E.4

Now, both bills do completely different things and are not in conflict with each other. Could the Chancery confirm what will happen if both bills pass?

I don't know. I guess technically I would just report that both bills passed and it would be up to the scribe (tagging Gödafrïeu Válcadác’h) to determine what the effect on the Lexhatx would be.

Is there any precedent for this?

Ideally in the future I think there would be someone (could be the scribe/a member of the scribery, the Sos/a member of the chancery, or a whole new position, though I guess considering the current workload of the Chancery maybe the second option is not ideal) who is given the explicit right to make determinations in advance of the clark for how the language should read in case of conflicting bills, where the principle should be if the intent of the bills is not contradictory then the lexhatx should be amended in such a way that it reflects both intentions* and if they are contradictory in such a way that both proposals change the lexhatx in the same direction but one is more far-reaching then the furthest-reaching proposal should have precedence and if they are contradictory in such a way that both proposals move in opposite directions then the two proposals cancel out and neither goes into effect.

* This appears to be the case here, which would create:
"An examination period shall begin with the prospective citizen’s first posting to Wittenberg after an introduction by the Interior Minister. At any time at least fifteen days after the beginning of the examination period, any current citizen of Talossa who has corresponded with the prospective citizen at least once using a medium other than Wittenberg (excluding emails from the Interior Ministry) may petition the Secretary of State requesting that a Royal Grant of Citizenship be issued to the prospective citizen. The petition must name the non-Wittenberg medium the petitioner used to correspond with the prospective citizen. If no such petition is laid before the Secretary of State within the first sixty days of the examination period, the examination period shall end, the immigration process for the prospective citizen shall be terminated, and their Wittenberg account shall be disabled. In addition, if a prospective citizen fails to ever make a first posting to Wittenberg within thirty days of their introduction by the Interior Minister then the immigration process for the prospective citizen shall be terminated, and his Wittenberg account shall be disabled. Furthermore, whenever an immigration process is terminated then the Interior Minister shall notify the nation and the prospective citizen of the termination, and shall post a notification to the effect on Wittenberg."

That would seem internally consistent.

Alternatively, an option would be to say whichever passes with the largest majority is adopted.

However, since neither mechanism is currently in place:

I don't know.
I think it's up to the Scribe.

[Açafat del Val]

I was thinking of voting against either this bill or the other, precisely because of this conflict. I did vote ultimately for both, but I want to point out that they do conflict partially. This bill sets an examination period of 60 days, whereas the other keeps the examination period of 40.

In any case, to the extent that the substantive changes do not interfere with each other, it would seem that the Scribe can simply smash the two parts together. The resulting paragraph should look like this:

An examination period shall begin with the prospective citizen’s first posting to Wittenberg after an introduction by the Interior Minister. At any time at least fifteen days after the beginning of the examination period, any current citizen of Talossa who has corresponded with the prospective citizen at least once using a medium other than Wittenberg (excluding emails from the Interior Ministry) may petition the Secretary of State requesting that a Royal Grant of Citizenship be issued to the prospective citizen. The petition must name the non-Wittenberg medium the petitioner used to correspond with the prospective citizen. If no such petition is laid before the Secretary of State within the first sixty days of the examination period, the examination period shall end, the immigration process for the prospective citizen shall be terminated, and their Wittenberg account shall be disabled. In addition, if a prospective citizen fails to ever make a first posting to Wittenberg within thirty days of their introduction by the Interior Minister then the immigration process for the prospective citizen shall be terminated, and his Wittenberg account shall be disabled. Furthermore, whenever an immigration process is terminated then the Interior Minister shall notify the nation and the prospective citizen of the termination, and shall post a notification to the effect on Wittenberg.

Super long and should be probably broken up into two separate subsections there, but alas.

[Gödafrïeu Válcadác’h]

So long as certain verbiage in one bill is *exactly identical* to that in the other bill, notation can be made in the Lex pertaining to both bills. No harm done that way imho.

Talossa has over the past ten years moved to the way of doing things even the smallest typo in any of our laws must be corrected by way of statute or other appropriate legislation. This is a good thing, in my opinion, and keeping to this precedent will prevent future abuses and shenanigans.

Saturday will see me a little more free to examine the other issues brought up here.

One thing I'm really trying to do with the Digest is to append to every single paragraph/section a link to the past legislation that makes said paragraph and section what it is at the moment. Of course, I will need to go back through the umpteen years of records and make appropriate additions of relevant links to said sections/paragraphs.

GV, Scribe

GV, Scribe